THE REPRESENTATION OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY.
[To ma EDITOR or THE " SPECTATOR:] Sin,—May I, not controversially, but simply as desiring information, ask what is your authority for stating in your issue of the 21st inst. that Tariff Reformers would in any case have a representative in Sir William Anson P My impression is that previous to the last General Election Sir William gave assurances in this matter which were accepted as satisfactory by leading Free-traders in his constituency, and I am not aware that he has in the interval committed himself further in the adverse direction. Are you not making a heavy demand on those who on the question of elementary education have in the main followed the line laid down by the Spectator when you urge them to support a candidate who has shown himself so uncompromising a supporter of the
opposite policy as Lord Hugh Cecil P am, Sir, &c.,
Oxford. A TirRYRER OP CONVOCATION.
[The fact that Sir William Anson Iles never been molested by the Tariff Reformers was our ground for believing him to have followed Mr. Balfour in adopting the policy of Mr. Chamberlain. As, however, our correspondent disputes the point, we can only say how delighted we are to think we may have made a misstatement in this particular. Lord
Hugh Cecil is no doubt opposed to the Spectator's pdlicy in regard to the education question, but that does not appear to be a reason for our treating him as a political leper. The question is one on which there may well be disagreement. No party can expect its members to be agreed on all points. Besides, the majority of Oxford Unionists are no doubt in agreement with Lord Hugh on this matter. This fact tends, with others, to make it appropriate that he should represent the University.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
